Tiebreaker Question (1 Viewer)

[Bluestaples]

I am hoping a non-biased view may help resolve the following...

Six teams make the playoffs in my league. Seeds 1 & 2 are locked.... 5 teams are "tied" for the last 4 spots.

Who is the odd man out?

Tiebreaker rules:

********************************

14 teams: 2 divisions, 7 teams each.

After the regular season:

Six teams make the play-offs,

The top team from each division will be ranked 1-2 and will earn 1st round play-off byes,

The 2nd ranked team from each division earn automatic play-off spots and will be ranked 3-4.

The final 2 wildcard play-off spots will be awarded to the next two highest ranked teams regardless of division and will be ranked 5-6.

(Yes, 4 teams from the same division can make the play-offs)

********************************

Additional Tiebreaker rules:

PLAYOFFS:

- Play-offs start in week 15, and last through week 17.

- Six teams, ranked one through six.

- Teams ranked one, and two get first round bye.

- Division winners will be ranked one & two regardless of record.

- Tiebreaker is head to head, 2nd tie breaker is points for, 3rd tiebreaker is division record, 4th tie breaker is a commissioner coin-toss.

- Play-offs games cannot end in a tie. The play-off tie breaker goes to which ever team has the highest scoring bench player, 2nd tie breaker is the 2nd highest scoring bench player, and so on.

- Teams that do not qualify for the play-offs will be matched against each other in the LBS tourney

- Only teams in the play-offs are allowed to perform Drop/Adds after week 14.

Standings:

Division 1:Team A: 9-5 (1,331 points for) - ByeTeam B: 8-6 (1,257 points for) - lost to Team C, beat Team E, lost to Team F, lost to Team GTeam C: 8-6 (1,221 points for) - beat Team B, lost to Team G, beat Team E, beat Team F, Division 2:Team D: 10-4 (1,334 points for) - ByeTeam E: 8-6 (1,363 points for) - beat team G, beat Team F twice, lost to Team B, lost to Team CTeam F: 8-6 (1,274 points for) - lost to team G, lost to Team E twice, beat team B, lost to Team CTeam G: 8-6 (1,230 points for) - lost to team E, beat team F, beat team C, beat team B

 

[chuckmorris]

If all info given were correct and didn't contradict itself, then it shouldn't be too hard to figure out. But the rules contradict themselves by saying that the second ranked team from EACH division earns an automatic playoff spot, but also saying that 4 teams from the same division can make the playoffs. With only 6 teams qualifying, that simply isn't possible. Because of that, I would argue that the first statement was phrased misleadingly, and that the latter one makes it clear that the intent was that the spots 3-6 would be awarded without regard to division.

At that point, it's just a matter of figuring out who beats who on tie-breakers. That of course depends on the rest of the info in the post being correct. However when I see that Team F lost to Team F twice, that casts doubt on the accuracy of the rest of the information. Try correcting who beat who, and see where that leads you.

 

[Chase Stuart]

But the rules contradict themselves by saying that the second ranked team from EACH division earns an automatic playoff spot, but also saying that 4 teams from the same division can make the playoffs. With only 6 teams qualifying, that simply isn't possible.

There are only two divisions.

 

[Bluestaples]

However when I see that Team F lost to Team F twice, that casts doubt on the accuracy of the rest of the information. Try correcting who beat who, and see where that leads you.

Good catch - Team F lost to team E twice (they are the only two affected teams that meet twice). Original post updated... the rest looks good.Thank you.

 

[RoarinSonoran]

Hmm, Team F beat itself twice?

Assuming cumulative head-to-head records:

Team C is the 2nd team from Division 1 (beat Team B)

Team E is the 2nd team from Division 2 (3-0 against F and G)

Team G is the 5th seed (2-0 against B and F)

Team F is the 6th seed (beat Team B)

Team B is SOL

ETA: oops. That's better.

 

[chuckmorris]

But the rules contradict themselves by saying that the second ranked team from EACH division earns an automatic playoff spot, but also saying that 4 teams from the same division can make the playoffs. With only 6 teams qualifying, that simply isn't possible.

There are only two divisions.

Oops! ... Sometimes I confuse myself. That being said, from the info given, C should get the 2nd playoff spot in that divison based on head to head record, and E should get the 2nd spot in the other division based on head to head victories over F and G. Then it comes down to who is odd man out between teams B, F and G for the other 2 spots. Before trying to figure that out though, it'd be nice to know if the statement that F defeated itself twice actually is a typo that should have referred to another team or not.

 

[chuckmorris]

Now I know why our commish insisted on using total PF as the first tiebreaker, instead of head to head.

 

[chuckmorris]

Now that I see your correction to who beat who, RoarinSonoran is correct. Team B is SOL for the simple reason that once you get down to just B, F and G, both F and G own the tiebreaker advantage over B based on head to head games.

 

[Bluestaples]

Now I know why our commish insisted on using total PF as the first tiebreaker, instead of head to head.

this is the 11th season for this league... we have a couple legacy rules in play today that have been there since we started - that is one of them. For the most part we all like the "legacy" type rules... I bet this one get put to bed after this season though.Points for would be *so* much more straight forward.I have revised the "team f" type-o in the original post. Thanks to all for the input.

 

[chuckmorris]

Now I know why our commish insisted on using total PF as the first tiebreaker, instead of head to head.

this is the 11th season for this league... we have a couple legacy rules in play today that have been there since we started - that is one of them. For the most part we all like the "legacy" type rules... I bet this one get put to bed after this season though.Points for would be *so* much more straight forward.I have revised the "team f" type-o in the original post. Thanks to all for the input.

Personally, I'd prefer head to head even though it can get more complicated. There's just something sweet about knowing you've got a tiebreaker edge over someone based on having kicked their tail head to head, and that's more in line with how the NFL resolves ties.

 

[[scooter]]

First, you must determine spots 3 & 4. Division 1 is fairly easy -- Team C gets the next spot because it beat Team B. The teams in Division 2 have no bearing on the outcome of Division 1.

Determining the Division 2 runnerup is a bit tricky. Your rules do not specifically say if you'll still use H2H2H if three teams are tied (or if the teams haven't played an equal number of games against each other), but I will assume that you use it. Therefore, Team E wins the next spot (with a 3-0 record versus F & G). Team B has no bearing in this tiebreaker. Even if you threw out H2H, Team E would win based on total points.

Next, you break the ties between B, F & G. Using H2H between them, Team G gets the 5th seed based on the 2-0 record.

Finally, you break the tie between B & F. Team F wins.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

This seems pretty straightforward, given your rules.

1 seed: D

2 seed: A

3 & 4 seeds are C (H2H over B) and E (H2H over F and G). Since C beat E, we have:

3 seed: C

4 seed: E

for the final two seeds, the contenders are B, F and G. Since G beat F and B, they are the five seed. And since F beat B, they are the six seed. So we have:

5 seed: G

6 seed: F

 

[RoarinSonoran]

Anyone else notice that the final 3 teams are F-B-G?

* yes, I know, not in that order

 

[Bluestaples]

' date='Dec 12 2006, 09:09 PM' post='6052285']Your rules do not specifically say if you'll still use H2H2H if three teams are tied (or if the teams haven't played an equal number of games against each other)

Yeah, that is the exact thing I was stuck on.... I had it stuck in my head that since there was a 5 way tie, that H2H just could not apply and that points for was the only answer. Writing it all out, and reading your responses has helped.... it is not as big of a mess as originally assumed. Thanks to all yet again, I think the answer is pretty obvious at this point.Go team.

 

[chuckmorris]

When resolving ties using head to head tiebreakers, you look at two teams at a time to see who holds the edge, rather than trying to throw them all in at the same time and figure out who loses that way. If E beat G head to head, then G can never hold the edge over E, no matter who else beat who. That's why B is clearly the odd man out. He loses out to both F and G, because they both have a win over him.

 

[[scooter]]

When resolving ties using head to head tiebreakers, you look at two teams at a time to see who holds the edge, rather than trying to throw them all in at the same time and figure out who loses that way. If E beat G head to head, then G can never hold the edge over E, no matter who else beat who.

This concept falls apart if G beat F and F beat E.

 

[chuckmorris]

' date='Dec 12 2006, 08:42 PM' post='6052402']

When resolving ties using head to head tiebreakers, you look at two teams at a time to see who holds the edge, rather than trying to throw them all in at the same time and figure out who loses that way. If E beat G head to head, then G can never hold the edge over E, no matter who else beat who.

This concept falls apart if G beat F and F beat E.

Actually, it doesn't. G obviously beats F, and the fact that F beat E doesn't tell us anything about whether G is ahead of or behind E assuming that all three have the same record. For that you'd look at the head to head games between G and E, and if there were none or they split them evenly, then you'd go on to the next tiebreaker etc. until something breaks the tie between them. You can't just assume that because G beat F and F beat E, then G would have also beaten E.

 

[[scooter]]

' date='Dec 12 2006, 08:42 PM' post='6052402']

When resolving ties using head to head tiebreakers, you look at two teams at a time to see who holds the edge, rather than trying to throw them all in at the same time and figure out who loses that way. If E beat G head to head, then G can never hold the edge over E, no matter who else beat who.

This concept falls apart if G beat F and F beat E.

Actually, it doesn't. G obviously beats F, and the fact that F beat E doesn't tell us anything about whether G is ahead of or behind E assuming that all three have the same record. For that you'd look at the head to head games between G and E, and if there were none or they split them evenly, then you'd go on to the next tiebreaker etc. until something breaks the tie between them. You can't just assume that because G beat F and F beat E, then G would have also beaten E.

Dude, pay attention to your own post!E beats G (therefore, G can never be ranked ahead of E)

G beats F (therefore, F can never be ranked ahead of G)

F beats E (therefore, E can never be ranked ahead of F)

ergo, circular illogic.

 

[thatguy]

You really ought to move to total points as the first tiebreaker. Not only is it more straight forward, but it's a better indicator or which teams have been better of the course of the season.

 

[QuizGuy66]

If your league doesn't explicit say so, you should (like the NFL) specify that all intra-divisional ties are broken first. Then you seed in the two first place and two second place teams.

Then you compare the two 3rd place teams.

Then you compare the 3rd place team that lost out above with the other division's 4th place team.

(Yes this is the same as played out above, but codifying it explicitly will keep bad feelings from arising in future seasons.

While both leagues I'm in use total points, in a past league where I was commish I used H2H without incident.

Now on a different question, looking at your league's schedule. Basically you play everyone once and then one other team a 2nd time. In the example above, 2 teams from the same division played that extra game. This can really screw with your tiebreakers, though since with 7 team divsions, there has to be at least one inter-divisional game. I'd personally suggest you clean this up by making one week during the year a "position week" just like they do in bowling league. Say after like week 7 you do this:

1st place vs. 1st place

2nd place vs. 2nd place

all the way down to

7th place vs. 7th place

This would bring a little mid-year excitment to your league. (Since it's mid-year, I suggest total points breaks ties for this). Or do it based on the prior year standings. Or just bag the one extra game altogether and go 13 games. The reason I bring this up is that say in the scenario above E and F happened to split the 2 games and E beat G, but F lost to G. Does E go through with a 2-1, 1-1, 1-2 tiebreak? Somehow doesn't seem right with the schedule imbalance.

Anyhow good luck in the playoffs

-QG

 

[Kleck]

Locked per request of original poster.